Roger vs Rafa

First topic message reminder :

This topic has been done to death but what would a good tennis forum be without it?  I am sure we will all implode once the two of them retire.  So here is yet another incarnation.  The old man is less and less likely to hold his own against the young(er) rival in the here and now, and I wanted to spare him humiliation of being demolished, so I erased his age disadvantage.

That is, I looked at the slam chase between Rafa and Roger relative to their age - i.e., I graphed their slam count as the function of their age.  The result is here:



A few obseravions:

1. This one is competitive, Fed can still hold his own against Rafa when I give him five years back and let them duke it out with no age advantage given to either one.

2. Rafa started much younger, so was well ahead by the time Roger started collecting slams, but then Roger shot up in his twenties and by age 26 he overtook Rafa.

3. If Rafa wins here in Australia, he will once again inch ahead of Roger.

4. It looks like the chase for 17+ could be very competitive.  Roger was doing extremely well until 29 - so much so that Rafa is unlikely to be ahead of him at 29 - but dramatically slowed down thereafter, which could allow Rafa to reach the finish line ahead of Roger.

I personally think it is a close call at this point.  For most of their careers I thought Fed would end up ahead of Rafa, and even now I would probably still give him slightly better than 50/50 odds, but it is very close - Rafa could well end up at 18+.

...that's already been covered a multitude of times JHM!
Absolutely HMM, I'm not saying he's at the same level but that some things are compensated partially.
Others, inc. Tenez, were the ones saying Federer was better than ever in 2012.
Clearly he's lost some foot speed, although not completely drastically.
Likewise if you watch Nadal on clay in 05/06 he was far more devastating than he is now.
But lets not forget other tennis players have improved too...it's not a black/white discussion.

Sorry but I have pointed this age fallacy out before. Look back through the ages and in head to head Rafa beats 24, 25, 26, 27,28,29, 30, 31 or 32 year old Roger more often than not.

Not picking a fight, Lydian, genuine question - what do you think he does better now than at age 25?

CaledonianCraig wrote:Sorry but I have pointed this age fallacy out before. Look back through the ages and in head to head Rafa beats 24, 25, 26, 27,28,29, 30, 31 or 32 year old Roger more often than not.

Is this a response to my post?

I'm not suggesting Roger has had or ever would have had the edge on Rafa. It's a killer match up and, in honesty, I think Roger lost the psychological battle there long ago.

I'm just saying he's a worse player at 32 than he was at 25.

lydian wrote:...that's already been covered a multitude of times JHM!
Absolutely HMM, I'm not saying he's at the same level but that some things are compensated partially.
Others, inc. Tenez, were the ones saying Federer was better than ever in 2012.
Clearly he's lost some foot speed, although not completely drastically.
Likewise if you watch Nadal on clay in 05/06 he was far more devastating than he is now.
But lets not forget other tennis players have improved too...it's not a black/white discussion.

It is interesting Lydian because you argued with me a great deal against players improving on tour after a few years. See Stan improve to 2.0 Stan, I remember that you argued against improvements to the game of Nadal, Djoko, or Murray vis a vis 07/08. Is this a change in position?

Here's a controversial one. Is the Novak of today better than the Novak of 2008?

At the end of 08, Novak held a slam, the Masters Cup and two Masters titles.

Currently Novak holds no slams, the Masters Cup and three Masters titles.

HM Murdoch wrote:Here's a controversial one. Is the Novak of today better than the Novak of 2008?

At the end of 08, Novak held a slam, the Masters Cup and two Masters titles.

Currently Novak holds no slams, the Masters Cup and three Masters titles.

Yes much better. At end of 2008 he had a terrible second half to the season. He has played in a number of grandslam finals in the time period and compiled 28 match in a row win streak. The third time since 2011 he won 20 matches in a row, all since 2011, before than he never had a 20 match win streak. He has more points and is ranked higher as well, he was a distant third in 2008 that is a big difference.

Yes, Socal, I think the win streak probably swings it to modern Novak.

I think 08 Novak was great though. He looked like he was on the cusp of really becoming something special. As it turned out there were two years of limbo!

There's been a lot of "what ifs" considered in the last few days. A big one is "what if Novak hadn't tinkered with his serve"?

But I've gone off topic there!

socal1976 wrote:

lydian wrote:...that's already been covered a multitude of times JHM!
Absolutely HMM, I'm not saying he's at the same level but that some things are compensated partially.
Others, inc. Tenez, were the ones saying Federer was better than ever in 2012.
Clearly he's lost some foot speed, although not completely drastically.
Likewise if you watch Nadal on clay in 05/06 he was far more devastating than he is now.
But lets not forget other tennis players have improved too...it's not a black/white discussion.

It is interesting Lydian because you argued with me a great deal against players improving on tour after a few years. See Stan improve to 2.0 Stan, I remember that you argued against improvements to the game of Nadal, Djoko, or Murray vis a vis 07/08. Is this a change in position?

No, not at all. That was a specific question about Nadal 05-08 vs 09-12. I consistently said he was better back then on clay...but more rounded on other surfaces now.

HM Murdoch wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Sorry but I have pointed this age fallacy out before. Look back through the ages and in head to head Rafa beats 24, 25, 26, 27,28,29, 30, 31 or 32 year old Roger more often than not.

Is this a response to my post?

I'm not suggesting Roger has had or ever would have had the edge on Rafa. It's a killer match up and, in honesty, I think Roger lost the psychological battle there long ago.

I'm just saying he's a worse player at 32 than he was at 25.

No just to those that cling to ageing being the reason for Roger not beating Rafa. You could pop Roger in a time machine or regress him to his absolute prime and more often than not Rafa would have beaten him. It is just one of those match ups that isn't good for Roger.

HM Murdoch wrote:Not picking a fight, Lydian, genuine question - what do you think he does better now than at age 25?

Didn't think you were.

With Annacone's guidance since 2010 he's become a more rounded attacking player at the net, something he was never comfortable with before that. His transitional movement to the net is better, as is his volleying. His BH slice is much stronger than before too, particularly down the line. His serving has also become more efficient.

When you look at some of his metrics from 04-08 vs 09-13 (5 years in each bracket). His ace count has gone up on average, and he's winning more 1st serve points....so the serving is better. But the returning/ground strokes isn't as good...return games won down. So, yes some areas are better, others that rely on movement not. Which is why he's hired Edberg...to elevate his forecourt and shorten points game given his serve is better than ever. Whether that can work is another matter...maybe against all but Nadal & Djokovic, which isn't bad if he can achieve that.

Good points.

Interesting about the serve stats. Could they be distorted by 16-14 and 19-17 final sets v Roddick and Del Potro? I seem to recall him hitting 50 against Roddick alone. Not that I'm doubting the stats, his serve has been consistently good for a long time.

Overall though, it strikes me as a significant net loss. He's declined in the fundamentals of the modern slow surface baseline game but improved in the riskier approach of net play.

lydian wrote:

socal1976 wrote:

lydian wrote:...that's already been covered a multitude of times JHM!
Absolutely HMM, I'm not saying he's at the same level but that some things are compensated partially.
Others, inc. Tenez, were the ones saying Federer was better than ever in 2012.
Clearly he's lost some foot speed, although not completely drastically.
Likewise if you watch Nadal on clay in 05/06 he was far more devastating than he is now.
But lets not forget other tennis players have improved too...it's not a black/white discussion.

It is interesting Lydian because you argued with me a great deal against players improving on tour after a few years. See Stan improve to 2.0 Stan, I remember that you argued against improvements to the game of Nadal, Djoko, or Murray vis a vis 07/08. Is this a change in position?

No, not at all. That was a specific question about Nadal 05-08 vs 09-12. I consistently said he was better back then on clay...but more rounded on other surfaces now.

It was not that specific because I remember you basically saying Djokovic was basically the same player as 07/08 and Murray as well except that they were fitter and that as ballstrikers they had not improved. The discussion at times also included these two. It is not a prosecution just wondering so you do believe a tennis player even later in their career can improve technically as well as physically. Because from past conversations I got the impression, maybe wrongly that you believed that after a few years on tour that once the 10,000 hours of work was up that these guys are basically finished products at least in terms of ball striking.

HM Murdoch wrote:Yes, Socal, I think the win streak probably swings it to modern Novak.

I think 08 Novak was great though. He looked like he was on the cusp of really becoming something special. As it turned out there were two years of limbo!

There's been a lot of "what ifs" considered in the last few days. A big one is "what if Novak hadn't tinkered with his serve"?

But I've gone off topic there!

Yeah the serve change really set him back a year and maybe even two years, almost robbed him of 2 years of what should have been one of the best parts of his career. Because not only was it the 15 or 16 months with the new motion but also the time it took him to get comfortable again and settled with his old motion.

That was sad to see. He had just broken through the Fedal barrier, then it was a big setback. He changed his racket as well I think - did he change it back in the end.
Then JMDP broke through, then did his wrist in.
A big shame in both cases.

lydian wrote:But the tour gets better BB, Federer couldn't keep up those 04-07 win rates. A lot of Federer's poor performances 09-13 were due to him not putting the heavy gym yards in (for whatever reason), he neglected the physical side and started to just rely on his talent. That's not enough in this day and age. Seems to me since he's cleared up the back and started working out properly again he's been a lot better. He may not have the explosive movement of his youth but he's a more rounded player in other ways...however, players have got a lot better around him too.

Whatever the reason he's not as good. As for 'the rest of the tour', we're talking about losses to guys he used to own (James Blake at the Olympics being one that stood out to me for sheer horror). Did they all get miles better too?

And in 2014, the time you're all ready to anoint as the second coming, he loses to Lleyton Hewitt. Yeah, that was happening all the time in 2006/7........,

JuliusHMarx wrote:That was sad to see. He had just broken through the Fedal barrier, then it was a big setback. He changed his racket as well I think - did he change it back in the end.
Then JMDP broke through, then did his wrist in.
A big shame in both cases.

The frame change at the same time did totally throw him off as well. JMDP is an interesting case in that an argument can be made that his extreme stringing has done him in. The guy uses all poly from what I have been told and strings to about 66 pounds. Now a large number of players do go all poly for their racquest but then they generally string super loose because the strings are so stiff. Some go down even into the 40s with that composition. Stiff Strings like that with no give strung to that tension must send shockwaves up his arm after each and every forehand. Maybe Lydian can confirm or refute this info I have on Del Po. No surprise honestly that a player would injure his wrist, or even shoulder with that string composition especially if he is hit for a hours a day.

Time to update the graph.  Dashed lines show where Rafa and Nole would be if they were to win tomorrow.

By not winning at the AO, Rafa slipped a bit vs Roger so he will be a touch behind even if he wins tomorrow.  Nole is very much in the in-between territory - win or lose he will be clearly behind Roger and Rafa, and clearly ahead of Andy.  So, as expected, the only race is between the top two.  Nole miles behind the two of them, and Andy miles behind Nole.

summerblues wrote:Time to update the graph.  Dashed lines show where Rafa and Nole would be if they were to win tomorrow.

By not winning at the AO, Rafa slipped a bit vs Roger so he will be a touch behind even if he wins tomorrow.  Nole is very much in the in-between territory - win or lose he will be clearly behind Roger and Rafa, and clearly ahead of Andy.  So, as expected, the only race is between the top two.  Nole miles behind the two of them, and Andy miles behind Nole.

All it shows really is that Fed has been better than everyone.

skyeman wrote:All it shows really is that Fed has been better than everyone.

Why do you say that?  It is very tight between Rafa and Roger.  If Rafa keeps winning slams after the age at which Roger slowed down, he has a chance to come out ahead.  Nole, on the other hand, is very unlikely to catch the two of them and Andy has little chance to catch Nole.

Agreed only Nedal has the chance of getting anywhere near Fed. But fast approaching 29, the sands of time and all that. He must win a few in the next two years to catch up. Just can't see it on the others surfaces now.

Roger and Rafa are undoubtedly in a different 'greatness league' to Novak.

Novak has a sniff of reaching the upper end of Tier 2 greatness alongside Lendl, Agassi, Connors and Mac but my suspicion is that he'll remain alongside Becker, Edberg and Wilander.

Traditional wisdom has always been that Rafa will decline at an earlier age than Roger. We are getting to the stage where we'll soon find out how accurate this is.

skyeman wrote:Agreed only Nedal has the chance of getting anywhere near Fed. But fast approaching 29, the sands of time and all that. He must win a few in the next two years to catch up. Just can't see it on the others surfaces now.

Medical technology has improved so much last 10 years , means Rafa can have an extended run than what was predicted say 6-7 years back. Rafa will remain a force for sure but how will the competitive pack like Nole , Murray, Del Potro reacts have to be seen.  

invisiblecoolers wrote:

skyeman wrote:Agreed only Nedal has the chance of getting anywhere near Fed. But fast approaching 29, the sands of time and all that. He must win a few in the next two years to catch up. Just can't see it on the others surfaces now.

Medical technology has improved so much last 10 years , means Rafa can have an extended run than what was predicted say 6-7 years back. Rafa will remain a force for sure but how will the competitive pack like Nole , Murray, Del Potro reacts have to be seen.  

This might well be true, but in that case it brings guys like Sampras into the mix big time. How many more Slams do we have to credit Pete with if he stays at physical peak for another 3/4 years? Maybe Federer is still chasing him down.

bogbrush wrote:

invisiblecoolers wrote:

skyeman wrote:Agreed only Nedal has the chance of getting anywhere near Fed. But fast approaching 29, the sands of time and all that. He must win a few in the next two years to catch up. Just can't see it on the others surfaces now.

Medical technology has improved so much last 10 years , means Rafa can have an extended run than what was predicted say 6-7 years back. Rafa will remain a force for sure but how will the competitive pack like Nole , Murray, Del Potro reacts have to be seen.  

This might well be true, but in that case it brings guys like Sampras into the mix big time. How many more Slams do we have to credit Pete with if he stays at physical peak for another 3/4 years? Maybe Federer is still chasing him down.

Rafa is one of those biggest use/abuse of medical system, which ever way one wants to put, for me its a real negative example if everybody starts to adopt such an approach, coz we have to wait and see what would be the impact on Rafa's body for all this medical technology application on his body.

I doubt it'll have any negative effects on him, other than permitting him to continue to play.

The platelet treatment he had used to be illegal but is ok now, and I understand is just therapeutic, but whether the wear he inflicts permitted by that technique is damaging, rather than damage from the treatment (which cannot happen so far as I know) is another thing.

skyeman wrote:Agreed only Nedal has the chance of getting anywhere near Fed. But fast approaching 29, the sands of time and all that. He must win a few in the next two years to catch up. Just can't see it on the others surfaces now.

He only turned 28 on June 3rd I think. Taking years away from him will make the task more difficult.

Frankly, Djokovic is about the only thing standing in Nadal's way of running away with the all time slam mark. All he needs for a tie are a couple of more french and a couple more off the clay. I would be surprised if Murray, Djoko, or Nadal aren't still fighting for slam titles over the next 3-4 years. The level of fitness, training techniques, modern medicine, the huge money involved, and the weakness of the chasing pack would lead one to believe that all three will win more slams. Probably multiple slams for all three.

Let's face it Djokovic is just happy to be runner up. Welldone on your 14th slam Nadal   

Time to update the graph yet again.  Rafa's dashed line became a solid line while Nole's dashed line did not - but such is life.

I have also added dashed lines showing where each of the big four will be if they manage to win Wimbledon four weeks from today.

It will be tough for Nadal to get to #17 given time is passing and the quality of having to go through Djokovic almost every time, plus Andy on HC or grass is no mean feat either.

It does have to be said that the quality of the slam final opponents Nadal's has had to beat for his 14 wins is staggering, he's had to beat either Federer or Djokovic in 10 slam finals, and Federer/Djokovic/Murray at semifinal stage in 3 of the other 4 wins.

The quality of competition beaten en-route is truly outstanding and somewhat unique in my opinion.

lydian wrote:Nadal will be lucky to get there given time is passing

It is pretty close at this point and we are reaching the point where Federer slowed down (or, rather, stopped, except for one Wimbledon win).  I think Rafa still has a shot.

He has a chance but a lot now depends, oddly enough, on the back rather than the knees. Shame about AO14/back too...but hey ho that's life.

It is still very much possible he can surpass Roger's total. We all know Rafa is currently untouchable on clay especially at RG so would it be jaw-dropping if he won the next two French Open's? I would be more surprised (just now) if he didn't. And Rafa is not all about clay as we saw at the US Open a few months ago.

CaledonianCraig wrote:It is still very much possible he can surpass Roger's total. We all know Rafa is currently untouchable on clay especially at RG so would it be jaw-dropping if he won the next two French Open's? I would be more surprised (just now) if he didn't. And Rafa is not all about clay as we saw at the US Open a few months ago.

Trouble is, he'd want to do it away from RG if possible. I agree that he still has a good chance to manage it though.

I'd say you're right that he would want to match/surpass Federer's all-time record by winning away from RG.

Despite his comments today that RG is his top priority every year, and that any other achievements are secondary, I'm pretty sure he would hope to end his career with a more balanced spread of Slam titles than he currently has.  

But the fact is RG remains his best chance of adding to the current tally.  Only one guy has found a way to stop him in Paris ; whereas when it comes to the other Slams, he has been taken out by six different players in the last four years alone.

IMO I'm not sure Nadal needs to surpass Roger Federer's 17 majors to be considered the greatest of all time.

Nadal could retire with 14/15/16 majors and his H2H records vs Federer Djokovic and Murray add to his legacy.

Gerry SA wrote:IMO I'm not sure Nadal needs to surpass Roger Federer's 17 majors to be considered the greatest of all time.

Nadal could retire with 14/15/16 majors and his H2H records vs Federer Djokovic and Murray add to his legacy.

GOAT debates are ultimately futile but to the extent we have them, I am fairly sure Rafa will need to get to 17 to be considered "the greatest of all time" in the media and public consciousness.  Once they are both retired and the dust settles, it will be more raw numbers than H2H records that people will be looking at.

If for no other reason then because it will be simpler for comparisons.  Imagine Rafa retires at 15 and some new hotshot comes years later and reaches 16.  Will the media say "he is the greatest of all time even though he is at 16 which is less than 17, but it is more than 15 that Rafa has"?  That just gets too complicated.

Putting aside the GOAT debate (which is opinion masquerading as statistical science), I think 17 slams is now very much in play for Rafa.

When Federer won his 14th, there was a generation of younger players waiting in the wings: Rafa was already a multi-slam winning world #1, Novak and Andy had won multiple masters. JMDP was just breaking through.

Rafa has no equivalent. He also seems to have mastery over his own generation at the slams.

As things stands, I think only injury or an unexpected surge from someone a la Djokovic 2011 can get in his way.

HM Murdoch wrote:Putting aside the GOAT debate (which is opinion masquerading as statistical science), I think 17 slams is now very much in play for Rafa.

When Federer won his 14th, there was a generation of younger players waiting in the wings: Rafa was already a multi-slam winning world #1, Novak and Andy had won multiple masters. JMDP was just breaking through.

Rafa has no equivalent. He also seems to have mastery over his own generation at the slams.

As things stands, I think only injury or an unexpected surge from someone a la Djokovic 2011 can get in his way.

It's certainly possible, although I don't think he starts as favourite for Wimbledon, and given that he has never retained any title off clay, that does cast doubts about the USO. After that were into 2015, which in tennis terms, is a long way away.

JuliusHMarx wrote:It's certainly possible, although I don't think he starts as favourite for Wimbledon, and given that he has never retained any title off clay, that does cast doubts about the USO. After that were into 2015, which in tennis terms, is a long way away.

Rafa's chances at Wimbledon are hard to judge. Recent history has shown him to be vulnerable in the first week. He's again having a few physical issues (this time with his back) which the transition to grass seems to exacerbate.

Should he make it through the first week though, I think his chances improve massively.

Wimbledon seems especially wide open this year. Each of the traditional Big 4 have question marks about form, fitness or confidence coming into it. Wawrinka has been very inconsistent too.

Shame JMDP is injured, I think the scene is set perfectly for him this year.

HM Murdoch wrote:Shame JMDP is injured, I think the scene is set perfectly for him this year.

True.
OT, but when the Fed/Rafa/Djoko/Murray fans mention that if it weren't for a certain injury, then such and such might have happened, they ought to remember that JMDP could have taken a slam or two from any of them (esp. HC) over the last 3 or 4 years. Speculation only tends to go one way.

I think Andy has another Wimbledon triumph in him, but not this year. Even through 2010 and 2011 I thought Fed would win another slam and it came to pass in 2012. He COULD win Wimbledon this year, but it's a huge ask. Djoko may not be winning slams but he's reaching title matches and as far Rafa is concerned he will surely do better at SW19 than in '12 or "13.
Always feel that in the non-French slams that Rafa can get blown away by someone serving bombs and/or playing great. Even as far back as 08 Tsonga just wiped him away at the AO.
So who's gonna win Wimbledon this year? Dunno (nothing like sitting on the fence, eh?!)

Wimbledon will be tough to call - I wouldn't want to make a prediction, think we may get a shock winner. A little early for USO predictions, but I'd make Nadal the prohibitive favorite - 20-1 in New York since 2010. Djokovic is probably second at the moment,

JuliusHMarx wrote:

HM Murdoch wrote:Shame JMDP is injured, I think the scene is set perfectly for him this year.

True.
OT, but when the Fed/Rafa/Djoko/Murray fans mention that if it weren't for a certain injury, then such and such might have happened, they ought to remember that JMDP could have taken a slam or two from any of them (esp. HC) over the last 3 or 4 years. Speculation only tends to go one way.

JMDP does not have a history of serial achievement even at Masters level. Hence, the reason why, for me, he has not been in the same bracket - but of course is younger and might do so

I perosonally have made no excuses for Murray's injury - I do not think he would have won the Australian Open for instance if he hadn't been injured

Significantly, all the 'big 4' share one thing in common - the ability to rise after an injury for the majors and get to a satisfactory round. Del Boy rarely does that when he's fully fit

Basically all the stars have to be aligned for Del Potro to achieve what the others (including Murray) do almost on a routine basis

I do think think that if he comes back from the lastest injury untarnished, then he can win more majors though

For me Andy has to start as favourite for Wimbledon, I can't see anything that would suggest otherwise. If Federer finds some form at Halle and is fit for Wimbledon I would make him second favourite.

As for the US Open that is open I feel. Be interested if Wawrinka hits another streaky patch because I would imagine the top players would want to avoid them in their section of the draw.

Legend - Beg to disagree about Andy starting favourite. New coach, weight of expectancy and the competition (remember he won last year after Rog and Rafa won ONE match between them) are against him.
If I had to bet, I would put more money on Rafa and Djoko than Murray. Interesting to see what odds you can get at the moment.

Sorry SFP I don't buy it. You have a guy on an 18 match winning streak on Grass.

Starts as the favourite for me. Of course this is subjective until we see the draw.

For as long as Rafa is the holder of the French Open, he is the slight favourite for me. He can just keep adding FOs and get to the record almost with that. If he doesn't win any of the next 4 slams including next year's FO well that's what it would take for Roger to go favourite again.

will rafa cath roger in slams? mmmm I thought he would have won australia instead of this one, so I expected him to be in 14 at this moment as he is, but, from now on?... we are talking about 3 slams, which in nadals average would mean 2 years at least and he is already 28. he can do it, but in my opinion, its not a given fact. of course if he wins wimbledon or usopen this year we will all think its more than possible... but if he doesnt, we will all most probably think that the train finally left. so as much as it is obvious, for me it all depends on him getting another slam this season

anyway,even if he catches up in slams, I wouldnt assure that rafa is goat instead of federer:


on the federer side:
far more WTF
lot more weeks at number 1

on nadal side:
h2h
masters1000